The Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Thursday devoted much attention to assuring that Region C — Southeastern Mass. — is not left behind in the casino market.

Comment

southcoasttoday.com

Writer

Posted Apr. 18, 2014 at 12:01 AM

Posted Apr. 18, 2014 at 12:01 AM

» Social News

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Thursday devoted much attention to assuring that Region C — Southeastern Mass. — is not left behind in the casino market.

Whether the attention yields results remains to be seen.

Arguments were made all around that the original set-aside for the Mashpee tribe, the projected lower annual revenue, the lower population and the greater density of competition make Region C's opportunity the most precarious relative to the other two regions.

A step taken Thursday was intended to advance the commission's stated goal of encouraging "robust competition" in Region C. It will now count all of a project's infrastructure costs toward the calculation of the minimum capital investment, even if the improvements were outside the property boundaries of the project, as previously calculated.

The reason this might matter is that the above stated arguments regarding Region C's disadvantages, particularly the lower revenue projections, make the investment less lucrative than in other regions. The change was requested by a developer that lost out on a bid for a slots parlor in Millbury, arguing that half a billion dollars invested inside the casino's footprint plus millions of infrastructure improvements outside the project, host community payments and other giveaways balloon the actual investment and make success less likely.

Commissioners who saw things this way (it passed 3-2) concluded that this might explain a few things. Like, why KG Urban's proposal in New Bedford has yet to attract an operator, why Fall River's New Harbor Mall project has yet to produce a Host Community Agreement within the mayor's deadlines, why Fall River's proposed developer Foxwoods has yet to contact the commission on any issue whatsoever and why no one else at all has applied in the region.

The commission now anticipates that potential developers and operators will see an improved investment environment, accomplishing the "robust competition" goal by offering the opportunity to propose a project of a scale that can more accurately reflect the potential in the market. This is a point we have argued for previously, and applaud the fact the legislation allowed this flexibility and that the commission availed itself.

The commission did not, however, extend the deadline for Region C applications, reasoning that it should canvass potential applicants about their openness to the new investment environment in order to determine the best time frame for the next part of the process.

This allows, at least in the short term, a measure of uncertainty to remain in the process, another hindrance to participation.

Of course, the commission's open discussion of the possibility of a tribal casino as a fourth project after three commercial licenses have been awarded assures that the uncertainty will be a consideration for the long term, as well. As one commissioner noted, there is no minimum capital investment on a tribal casino.

At least the rhetoric from all five commissioners recognizes the challenges faced in Region C, but the longer the process goes on, the more ground Southeastern Mass. gives up.